The Sun. — London, England, 1838-05-01 00:00:00

ESLEYAN MISSIONARY SOCIETY. tnd thAt neither the petition nor the optKisition thereto were (YESTF-RDAI.) frivolous or vexatious. The Clerk of the (71-ct.\- - , was then directed to attend to - - sorrow iii ekiicr to amend the return. ~ ', : ‘,talOns were presented by Me. flVvii§a iYtnn in 6 peoprte tors of the Birmingham Cam_t.! Company ; by Mr. VILLIERS, and by Mr. But.:tt , .t sg,ainst certain clauses in the Grand Junction rtiiihriy Bill. Sir S. GLYNN Moved Olt third reading of the Ring's Ferri 'R o o, Bat . MeS WILBRAHAYI complained that the till had been taken out of the hands of the Members for the county, and placed in the hands of a fitrtmger. After a few wore from Mr. JARVIS the Bill was read a third time and passed. Mr. 0. BROWNE presented a petition from Mayo, and two petitions from the county of Sligo, praying that the River Moy Navigation Bill might be re-considered. Mr. DIVETT brought up the Report of the Committee on the Bristol and Exeter Railway Bill. Mr. BLACKBURN presented a petition from the pawn brokers of Warrington, against the British Pledge Society Bill. On the motion of Mr. EASTH OPE, the Leicester Gas Bill was read a second time, and ordered to be committed. Mr. HOUSTON presented a petition from Renfrew, in favour of the Glasgow Railway Bill. On the motion of Mr. R. FERGUSSON, the London derry Bridge Bill was read a second time, and ordered to be committed. On the motion of Mr. LAW HODGES, the Gravesend Cemetery Bill was read a third time, and passed. On the motion of Sir G. STRICKLAND the Brampton and Brierley Road Bill was read a second time, and ordered to be committed. Ors-the motion of Mr. J ONES the Lochfoyle Drainage Bill was read a second time, and ordered to be committed. 'On the motion of Lord STANLEY the Bolton and Pres ton Railway Bill was read a second time, and ordered to be committed. Lord EBRINGTON brought up the Report of the Select Committee on the Standing. Orders. Mr. YORKE brought up the Report of the Committee on the Wickam (Cambridge) Inclosure Bill. Mr. A. CHAPMAN presented a petition from Whitby, praying for the better observance of the Sabbath. Mr. CRAVEN BERKELEY presented a petition from Stroud, in Gloucestershire, agreed to at a public meeting, praying for the abolition of Negro Slavery. Sir E. FILMER presented a petition from a place in Kent, praying for an alteration in the Poor Law Amendment Act. (Conclusion, from our Second Edition of last night.) Petra JONES (the Indian Chief) Beconded the resolution. ,poke at some length, in excellent English. The Rcv. E. FRASER (a native West Indian pt'eclier) sup ported the resolution, in an address marked by considerable ability, and which was received with great applause. G. FlNcn, Esq., proposed the third resolution, upon reicr r'ng to the mission about to be sent out to Christianize the in habitents of New Zealand, the Figee and oth er I s l an d s. 11. PowNELL, Esq. seebncled the resolniion. The Rev. Mr. aoron Missionary from Ceylon, elo quently supported the resolutin, which was unanimously carried. Mr. Hardy here retired amidst loud applause, and his place as Chairman was tilled by H. Pownall, Esq. Vicount BEavAP,D moved the 4th Resolution, which related to the North American Indians, and deprecated the encroach ments makins:, by the British on the Indian lands. The Her,, and Rev. Mr. BERNARD (brother of the Viscount) seconded the Resolution. The Rev. T. WAvou (from Ireland) supported the Resolu tion, which was carried unanimously. The Rev. Mr. BUNTING then announced the Rev. R. New ton, and the collection._( Loud laughter.) The Rev. R. NEwToN, who was received with great ap plause, moved the fifth resolution, which was carried unani mously ; and shortly after five o'clock, the meeting, which Ras at once crowded an;l respectable, separated. ELECTION COMMITTEES. (YESTERDAY.) (From our Second Edition of last night.) II U L L. The Committ ee met at eleven o'clock, but strangers were 'not tdmitted till half-past twelve o'clock. When Counsel and Agents were called in, the Chairman stated that the Committee had considered the vote of Henry Hilkin was a good vote. The next case that was gone into, and the evidence upon which was not concluded when the Committee adjourned, was that of William Hunter. It appeared that the voter, in going to the poll, stated that he meant to give his vote for Hutt and Wood, but the vote was entered in the books as having been given for Wilberforce. The object, therefore, was to strike the name from the votes of the latter, and add it to the votes of the former party. efiposite had arrived at the determination that he could not support the MK With regard to the st. clause, he should not have anticipated ihiit onj• eery serious argument of importance would have been raised on that clause. TIM ease of settlement lie-was willing to admit was of far more importance, but While the Hon. Member felt so deeply en subject, he seemed to have pat- out of Consideration the great di&ultiee Whieh efoott in the way of his proposition being carried into effea. It was said that tile overseers and guardians would be com pelled to give relief to strangers, elhe Weed withdraw it, therefore, from those to whom it should be granted, the inhabitants of the district which the guardians lived. But as there was no eorepuleory relief ilesir)=- - were the guardians compelled to give assistance in one case and refuse it I Bet if they were to grant it at all, it would he better certainly thaa CIIdS petsone who were living in their own neighbourhood should receive it, anti that it should not be given to strange paupers. The Hon. and Learned Member for Tipperary. had not attempted to grapple with the provisions of the Bill them selves. but by instituting a comparison between its probable effects and those of another measure which was also before them, he had en deavoured to show that the measure was one which the House could not safely pass. Thli at least showed that there was little which could be Urged against the Bill itself, and would tend to show also that little exclise remained to those llonourable Gentlemen who should continue to oppose its being passed into a law. But what said an Hie hOutable and Gallant Member orpocite ? He had hitherto invariably steipetted the Measure; but nOW jIC C :me forward and said that it was se sweeping and eo seateneibe In its prov felons, that he had determined to withdraw his support theta It. He said, too, that the Government had not varied the Bill at all in aceerdenee with the amelidnients which had been proposed. He denied this on the part of Government 01 fa: as regarded these points, which were not important to the principle ale. the whole character of the Bill; but if the Government had abandoned the right to give relief to able-bodied paupers, the chief merit of the Bill would have been taken away, and they would be palming a fallacy on Ireland with reference to the Poor-law. Was it not notorious that in that country imposition was carried on to the greatest possible extent on the humane and charitable, and that mendieaney prevailed so far that there were many persons who made a living by their pursuing that trade in preference to their obtaining honest em employment ?—('• No," from Mr. O'Connell.) The hon. member might say " No," but he must admit that there were cases of deceistion of a very alarming description. It was necessary in the condition of things that it should be so, and it was declared to be the case most pointedly by the commissioners who had berm appointed to inquire into the sub ject. But was not the mode of relief at present adopted infinitely more expensive and attended with much greater waste than that which would be introduced by the Bill which was now before the House being carried ? Then it was said that Ireland was too eider to support its paupers; he must confess, however, that it did not seeitl to him to be possible that a country could be found to be really in such a state if the produce was properly distributed. But what class was it by whose kinds ness and charity that the poor were now supported e It was the poor themselves ;—(Hear, hear)—and it was owing to their character and their religious feelings that their present support wes to be attributed, He had himself seen a ease in Ireland where he witnessed more human misery and destitution that he could have imagined. In a village which he visited he found the people living in wretched hovels, which were without windows and without doors, while the wretched beings were unprovided for even with straw to make their miserable beds, and yet they were paping a yearly rental of 30s. or 325. to their landlord. He had the curiosity to what was the probable amount received by the proprietor the lands, and he was assured that it could not be less than 0,0001. Did the individual to whom he referred support the poor ? Did he contribute in aid of the funds of those excellent charitable in stitutions of the neighbourhood of his estate—or did lie, as the poor man always did, give " the bit and the sup" to the poor peasant who came to see him ? In the whole course of his inquiry lie could but find one in stance in which any portion of the great fund which lie had received had been appropriated to charitable purposes on the estate. The fact was that all the regulations, however excellent they might be for the main. tenance of houses of industry, were inoperative, because they were not compulsory. Ile contended that it was the duty of the Legislature to provide some uniform system for the relief of the really destitute, and thus get rid of the difficulties they now had to contend with. With re spect to the question of vagrancy, he admitted that it was necessary for the working of the Bill that some sound system of vagrant laws must be introduced into Ireland, and also that assistance must be afforded in some shape or other for the employment of the poor. He thought even in a pecuniary point of view it would be advisable to effect local improve ments in many districts in Ireland. Mr. M. J. O'CONNELL thought that in the present - state of Ire land it was desirable that there should be some system of Poor-laws in Ireland, but lie feared that the present measure would rather have the effect of paralyzing than bringing out the resources of the country. Lord STANLEY could not vote for the third reading of the Bill, without expressing his dissent from a great many of the provisions cm tallied in it, and also from expressing his doubts as to the working of many more of them. So much was left to the Commissioners, that It wee unavoidable that the House could be otherwise than utterly uncertain and ignorant as to what would be effects of the Bill, either as regarded the recipients of relief, the ratepayers, or the landlords of Ireland. His Right Ron. Friend said that it was not determined in the Bill whether 100 or 1,000 workhouses would be necessary in Ireland for the carrying out the workieg of the Bill. It would, therefore, be impossible to say what would be the charge on the landowners of Ireland, It was, how. ever, left to the Commissioners to say what should be the amount of taxation that should fall on the Irish people, and how it should be pro portioned. With respect to the amount of relief that would be re quired, what a diversity of opinion existed on the subject. Mr. Nicholls, in his Report, said that it would be necessary to erect only 100 work.. houses, with accommodation for 100 persons in each. This was to ray, that means of relief should be only provided for 80,000 persons. The Commissioners were to have the power of building as many work houses as they pleased—for instance, a thousand workhouses, with accommodation for a thousand persons in each; and this with. out the consent of the rate-payers, who were to defray all the ex penses. If a workhouse in a union was too large for the destitute in the district, it might be filled with those from distant places. His Right Hon. Friend said that it was impossible that a system of vagrant laws could be introduced in the Bill, but that it was absolutely neces sary that some system should be enacted. Now, he thought that it would be most unjust if they passed a law to punish vagrancy without giving a legal claim to relief, and they could not de this without giving local settlements. They were also so ignorant of what would be the mo ral effects that would be produced by the Bill in Ireland that they were legislating in the dark. The time, however, had arrived when it was absolutely necessary that some provision should be muds for the relief of the destitute poor in Ireland. The measure as it stood was highly ob jectionable in many points of view, but some measure of relief for the poor of Ireland was imperatively called for on all sides, and therefore, however reluctantly and hesitatingly, he should should support tho third reading of the Bill. Mr. O'CONNELL intimated that he should divide the house also on the question that the Bill do pass. The House then divided, and the hurnbers were— For the third reading ......... 234 Against it ...... 59 Majority —.175 On the question that the Bill do pass, Mr. O'CONNELL wished to make two remarks. One of them was reference to something which had fallen from the Right Hon. Member for Manchester, who had stated that, in the present state of pauperism in Ireland, there were many eases of imposition. Phis was an assertion in the very teeth of facts, fur the whole evidence on the subject proved that there was a universal anxiety in the minds of the Irish people to labour whenever they got work to do.—(Hear.) This, therefore, was a calumny on the Irish people, which ought not to have been uttered by the Right Hon. Gentleman. Again, the Noble Member for Bath had talked of the agitation which had been got up against the measure. The Noble Lord might be assured that he (Mr. O'Connell) would have found it much easier to get up an agitation in favour of the Bill, but he bad throughout given the measure his honest opposition, because he thought it calculated to injure Ireland, and he would give fair notice that he would never cease, by all honest agitation, to endeavour to get rid of the evils of the measure. After the decision just taken, he should not trouble the House again to divide.—(Heare Viscount CASTLEREAGH had witnessed the third reading of the Bill with deep sorrow, but he derived no slight consolation from his confident expectation that its provisions would be modified in that place where wicked measures were sure always to find a salutary check.— (Great laughter.) Lord J. RUSSELL could not allow the Bill to pass its last stage without loudly protesting against the language which had been used by the Noble Lord, when he asserted that the Bill had passed its third reading by a majority of English Members, who had not considered its details or its consequences.—(Hear,) He thought that those Irish Members who opposed the Bill, or who gave way to language such as that of the Noble Lord, did an injustice not only to themselves but to their Representatives.—(Hear.) This very measure was produced last year in all its details, and having half gone through a Committee of the House in the course of the past session, every part of it was neeessa city well known in Ireland at the time.—(Hear, hear.) Its second reading was supported by a large majority of Irish Members, and under these circumstances it was an exceedingly unfair and un just representation of the legislation of that House to say that the Bill had been carried solely in consequence of the support of an English majority, who had not considered its details or its conse quences.—(Hear, hear.) He could safely say that with the exception of the English Poor-law Bill, which was considered so long in Committee, and he might remark that, if he had taken no part in this debate, it was only because he considered almost every argument on the subject exhausted, that tine question had been put in every light in which it possibly could be put by lion. Gentlemen who had paid the closest at tention to the subject. With the exception of the English measure, he mould safely say that he hardly knew any Bill which had been more anxiously and carefully considered—(Hear, hear)—or which could be more honestly described as having received the deliberate and dispas sionate sanction of the House.—(Hear, hear.) The Bill was then passed without a division. MUNICIPAL CORPORATIONS (IRELAND) BILL. Sir R. PEEL begged to ask the Noble Lord what course he- proposed with respect to the Municipal Corporations (Ireland) Bill ? Lord JOHN RUSSELL had before stated that he did not wish to proceed with the Bill in question till the sense of the House hail been taken on his tithe resolutions ; he should therefore fix it for the same day, with the view of subsequently postponing it. MEDICAL CHARITIES IRELAND BILL. Mr. F. FRENCH in moving the second reading of this Bill, said, that it was proposed that the debate should be reserved for the Committee. Mr. SMITH O'BRIEN hoped that the Honourable Gentleman would not that night press the Bill to a second reading, as a great num ber of Irish Members wished to take part in the discussion upon it; and inasmuch as a great interest was felt with respect to the Bill, and it was perfectly obvious from the present state of the house, that there was no expectation entertained by a great many Members, that the Bill would have come on upon a Government night. IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT. Viscount MELBOURNE said the Noble Lord might draw what inference he pleased, but he begged leave to pro test against any such inference as that which had just been stated. THE CORONATION. The Marquis of LONDONDERRY inquired whether it Was intended by the Government to change the period that had been announced for the Coronation ' • and also wh e th er they me ant to allow tho people to have a Coronation on the old established scale? Viscount MELBOURNE said it waa intended to post pone the Coronation for a day or two in the same week that had been announced—probably to the 28th—in order to avoid a circumstance which bad been alluded to, namely, the anniversary of the death of George the Fourth. He himself did not see there was any reason for that, because there was hardly one day in the year but what was the anniversary of some melancholy event. The acces sion of every .Sovereign to the throne was always observed; and yet the accession was necessarily the anniversary of the death of the preceding Sovereign. lie, therefore, did not think the objection which had been urged to the day already fixed was a very weighty one. It was not the intention of the Government to make any alteration in the ceremony from that which had been already stated in the proclamation. If, however, the Noble Lord thought proper to make any specific motion on the subject, he (Lord Melbourne) would be ready to meet him. lie could not plead guilty to the charge of being indifferent to ancient usages or customs, or of not being desirous of preserving that which remained of antiquity, or of a want of reverence for the practices of their ancestors—he could not plead guilty or admit that he was liable to any such charge. He thought the ceremonies that had been alluded to might be safely given up, especially as there was a precedent for doing so. There was also another reason which was extremely important at the present day, which was the great diminu tion of expense, and great fatigue would be saved to her Majesty. He thought he was not entitled to the in sinuations that had been thrown out against him by the Noble Lord ; the same course that was now proposed to be pur sued was adopted at the last Coronation with great sa tisfaction to the nation at large. There certainly did exist in London some discontent, but he did not think that sufficient to prevent the Ministry from adopting the course pointed out. He could not see that by leaving out part of the pageant that had hitherto attended a Coronation the dignity of the Crown would be compromised. BISHOP F ALTA. The Earl o f SHREWSBUORY M gave notice that it was his invention on the Bth of May to call the attention of their Lordihius to the correspondence that had taken place between the Bishop of Malta and the Court of Rome. The Earl of \VINCIIILSEA, having been informed that Mr. Turton had sailed for Canada, wished to put a few questions relative to that individual to the Noble Viscount opposite, and he trusted that the Noble Viscount would give him a clear and decided answer to them, as they affected deeply not only the country hut the character of the Sovereign.— ( Hear.) If he was correctly informed, this individual had sailed iu one of her Majesty's ships, and it must therefore be presumed at the public expense. He could not do the Noble Earl into whose hands the affairs of Canada had been placed, the injustice to suppose that an individual of Mr. Turton's character had gone out with him as his private friend. The qte-stions he wished to put were—first, whether any puhlic si tuation of any character had been off, red to that individual, or any promise made to him, or any ground given him to sup pose, that when h e got out to Canada he would be appointed to some public situation. Ile wished also to know if that individual had treni prom Led any remuneration, under the sanction of the Noble Viscount, for his s, rvices in Canada.—( Hear.) These were questions which he had a right to put to the Go vernment. He knew the morel worth of his countrymen, and they would say that if the Ministry had recommended such a person to their youthful and virtuous Queen, they had committed a gross dereliction of duty.—( Hear, hear, hear.) He maintained that if that individual had gone out in any public situation, either given or prospective— if he had gone out with the prospect of getting an appoint anent, the advisers of her Majesty had been very remiss in the performance of their duty. Ile considered that he had a right to put these questions; he had a right to know whether the Ministers had given any such appointment, or whether they would sanction such a one, if made by the Noble Earl who was her Majesty's representative in Canada. Viscount MELBOURNE considered the Noble Earl had exceeded the limits which were usually adhered to by the courtesy of the House in asking questions. He (Lord Melbourne) would not go into the question, as it in volved the character of the individual alluded to. He would confine himself to answering the questions put to him. In the first place, no situation whatever was ever offered to the gentleman by the Government ; and if he had gone out to Canada, as he believed he had, he had gone out without any appointment either given or prospective —nor was the Govern ment aware of any intention on the part of the Noble Earl ( Durham) to appoint the gentleman alluded to to any public I Situation. The Bills on their Lordship' Table were advanced a stage, and the House adjourned. ROUSE OF COMMONS, APRIL 3O The SPEAKER took the Chair at the usual hour. Mr. Campbell, from the East India House, appeared at the bar with returns of the compensation granted to reduced ser vants of that Company. Laid on the table. GREAT YARMOUTH ELECTION. Mr. Baxmi, as Chairman of the Great Yarmouth Election Committee, appeared at the bar and reported that the Com mittee had decided that Chas. Edw. Rumbold, Esq., and Wm. Wilshere, Esq., were duly elected to serve in Parliament for the Burgh of Yarmouth, and that neither the petition nor the opposition were frivolous or vexatious. I\qp i k,...TIRLINGSHIRE ELECTION. Goo l t; 419 LCAttPigjaairman of the Stirlingshire Election Ifie„ -6, 415PlIati the bar, and reported that William Forbes,nsq-, vfe&ittl:idiily elected to serve in Parli4knent for the Shire of Stirling-1 nd that Col. George R. Abercrom bie was duly elected, and ought to have been returned es a Coaliniasioner to serve in Parliament for the said shire, Ai HOUSE OF LORDS, APRIL 30. The LORD CHANCELLOR took his scat on the Woolsack at Five n'Clock. Lord SKELMERSDALE presented a petition from OrmskiA, in Lancashire, for the better observance of the Sabbath. Also a petition from the same place against any Ole - nation of Church property. The Marquis of SLIGO presented petitions for the total abolition of Negro Slavery from several places in the county of Cumberland, from Weybridge, From; Carlisle, Rockcliffe, and numerous places in the county of York. Lord GLENGALL gave notice that he should, on Friday next, move for a return of the names of individuals furnished to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland, to serve the office of High Sheriffs for the year 1838, and also for a return of the names of the individuals appointed High Sheriffs by the Lord Lieutenant. SPANISH SERVICE. Lord LYNDHURST wished to ask the Noble Viscount opposite whether it was the intention of Government to renew the Order in Council for the Enlistment of British subjects in the service of the Queen of Spain ? Viscount MELBOURNE said it had already been stated in another place, that it was not the intention of the Govern ment to renew the Order in Council. Lord LYNDHURST wished then to observe, that by the Foreign Enlistment Act, British subjects would subject them selves to a severe penalty by entering or continuing in foreign service withoui.the licence of the Crown, and that he had been informed many persons ROW in the service of the Queen of Spain, intended to continue in that service after the 9th of June. Viscount MELBOURNE said, that although it was not the intention of the _Government to renew the Order in Coun cil, yet it would be a matter for the consideration of the advisers of the Crown, whether a special license should not be granted to those who intended to continue in the Spanish ser vice.—(" Hear, hear," from Lord Lyndhurit.) The Marquis of LONDONDERRY thought that what had just fallen from the Noble Viscount was an admission of the entire failure of the policy of the Government in regard to Spain. Tut: SUM', LONDON, TUESDAY, MAY 1,183 P. Mr. A. 'WHITE presented a petition from Sunderland against any further endowment to the Church of Scotland. Mr. WARD presented a petition from Sheffield, stating the excellent effect that had been produced in that town by the abolition of the Combination Laws, and praying that no further change might be made with respect to them, without affording to the petitioners ample opportunity of being heard before the Combination Committee. The HON. MEMBER also presented a petition against Mr. Sergeant Talfourd's Copyright Bill. Mr. EASTHOPE presented a petition from Yarborough, praying for the immediate abolition of the Negro apprentice ship system. Also one from Leicester, most numerously and respectably signed, praying that no' further endowment might be made to the Scottish Church. Colonel VERNER presented five petitions from the county of Armagh, against the Irish Poor-law Bill. HULL ELECTION. Mr. PRA ED had a petition to present from certain wit nesses who had been summoned to give evidence before the Hull Committee—as the Committee could not take cogni zance of the matter the petition might be presented. It was from two gentlemen who had been summoned to attend, and had attended upon the Committee since the 17th March, and others from the Ist April, without having been called —they were detained until the recess, when the Committee rose—they then received their discharge—their expences were taxed, and they were promised payment, but they had not yet got it, and were detained in town in consequence. Mr. LANGDALE said the agent had been out of town for some time, but he had now returned, and was prepared to pay the petitioners. Mr. BAIL LIE presented a petition from the compositors and pressmen of Worcester, against the Copyright Bill. Sir E. KNATCHBULL presented a petition from the Archdeacon and Clergy of the diocese of Canterbury against certain clauses in the Benefices Pluralities Bill. Mr. CHALNIERS appeared at the bar with minutes of evi dence taken before the Kinsale Election Committee.—Laid on the table. Sir C DOUGLAS presented a petition from Warwick, praying for protection to the Established Church. Mr. PE NDAR VE S presented a petition from the parish of St. Paul's and its vicinity, praying for the abolition of Negro apprenticeship. Mr. SHAW LEFEVRE brought up the report of the Committee on the Highway Rates Bill. Mr. T. ATTWOOD presented petitions from Stockton upon-Tees, and from a Catholic Congregation in Birmingham, praying for the abolition of Slavery ; also a petition from Bir mingham, praying for the release of the five Glasgow cotton spinners. Lord CASTLEREAGH presented petitions from parishes in the county of Down, against the Irish Poor-law Bill. Mr. JENKINS presented a petition from Shrewsbury, against any further grant to the Ma)nooth College. Mr. VERNON SMITH presented a petition from North ampton for the immediate abolition of Negro slavery. Mr. CLAY presented a petition from the Independent Gas-light and Coke Company, praying the House to introduce a Clause into the Bill now in progress to prevent the mono poly of the Coal-merchants of London. Mr. O'CONNELL presented four petitions against Negro slavery. Mr. Alderman COPELAND presented a petition from Stoke-upon-Trent, praying the House not to repeal the new Poor law Bill ; also a petition from the same place, against the Rating of Tenements Bill. On the motion of Mr. JOHN ABEL SMITH, the West India Dock Bill was read a third time, and passed. Mr. KINNAIRD presented a petition from the Lord Provost and Town Council of Perth, in favour of the Edin burgh and Glasgow Railway Bill ; also, a petition from the Society of Procurators in Perthshire in favour of the Sheriffs Court Bill. The Hon. Member next presented a petition from the Relief Presbytery of Auchterarder against any fur ther endowments to the Church of Scotland. Mr. PRAED gave notice that to-morrow he would move that the petition he had presented from the witnesses before the Hull Committee, be referred to the Committee on con troverted election expences. Mr. BAINES presented a petition from a place in Scot land praying that no farther grant might be made to the Scotch Church, or to Schools established on sectarian principles. The Hon. Member then presented a petition from the Town Council of Leeds, in favour of Mr. Hill's plan for the reduc tion of the rates of postage. POST-OFFICE. Lord CASTLEREAGH wished to know whether the Government had taken into consideration the propriety 3f sending letters for Ireland, by way of Liverpool instead of Holyhead ? Lord MORPETH said that the subject was one of impor tance, and that the Government would take it into considers. tion. Lori MORPETH presented a petition from the Grand Jury of the county of Meaty, against the Irish Poor-law Bill in its present shape. POOR LAW RETURNS. Mr. CO LIRTE NA Y seeing tke Noble Lord the Secretary for the Home Department in his place, begged to call th e attention of the House to a subject of which he thought he had a right to complain. Four months since he had moved for an order calling for the return of the number of union workhouses ; and although he had made numberless inquiries of the Noble Lord, and had received repeated promises from him, yet the returns had not yet been laid on the table. He wished the Noble Lord to state the reason of the delay. Lord J. RUSSELL said the Poor Law Commissioners had required returns to be made to them, and on the last occa sion he had made inquiries respecting them he found that they had received only five hundred of the returns, and wanted about one hundred; he had suggested that they had got enough to enable them to make the return, and he believed it would shortly be on the table of the House. As the subject had been brought under the notice of the House, he would ask Hon. Members to pay some attention to the amount of papers required in some of the returns moved for. One return which had been moved for, by the Hon. Member for Finsbury, caused the Poor-law Commissioners to issue no less than 9,000 papers. Of course clerks must be employed, and where such an amount of labour was cast upon them, if delay occurred it was not to be wondered at. TITHE TATION.' Sir EDWARD KNATCHBCOMMUULL wishe . d to ask the Noble Lord whether it was the intention of the Government to introduce any Bill for altering the system of Tithe Corn mutation. Lord JOHN RUSSELL said it was not the intention of the Government to introduce any such measure. The Com missioners would make a report early in May, which would be laid before the House. HIGHLAND SCHOOLS. Mr. COL QUHOUN wished to ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether it was the intention of the Government to abandon the Highland Schools' Bill, or to proceed with it ? It had been introduced early in February, and had passed no farther yet than a second reading. The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said the second reading of the Bill had been postponed, in consequence of a notice of an arnek4ment that had been g iven. He b egge d further distinctly t(i - assure the Hon. Member, that he was not disposed to abandon the Bill, or relinquish the hope of carry. ing it. COUNTY RATES. Mr. GALL Y KNIGHT gave notice that, on the second reading of the County -rates Bill, he should move as an amendment the adoption of certain resolutions. BENEFICES AND PLURALITIES. Mr. HUME gave notice that on going into Committee on the Bill for abridging Pluralities he should move as an amend ment, that it be an instruction to the Committee to provide for the abolition of all pluralities.---( Hear.) THE BUDGET. The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER gave no tice that on Friday week he should bring forward his financial statement for the year.__( Hear, hear.) THE CORONATION. Sir R. INGLIS said, that as it appeared by the Gazette that there would be no banquet at the approaching Coronation, he was anxious to know if any precession would take place, by which the public at large would be enabled to witness some portion of that interesting ceremony. Lord JOHN RUSSELL•said it was nOt intended that the Coronation should take ~ ilaic i4 the tail manner as in the Vil'e late nbvet, g n William the Fourth; but he He should stale n ow . k‘buici add further th a t th ere wou ld b e a process i on from the Palace th roug h t h e streets t 9 WettmiNtee Atile6y. ► tion. ~ hat h e r M a j esty had i s proted, of thO, adAO, which " !ion. Priend had askedthe qUeS haci been offered t 8 and that it would be forin illy stetted et a Council soon to be held, that the Coronation would take place on the 29th June, instead of the day originally fixed.—( Hear, hear.) Sir F. TRENCH inquired if it was the intention of the Government to recommend, according to tw.s precedents which he would refer to, that the ladies of the Court should at the Coronation be dressed in British manufactures.—( Oh l) There were 50,000 starving manufacturers in the country. The precedents to which he referred were two directions, one the 20th, the other the 31st of March, in these words: " It is the particular desire of the Queen, that her Nlaj,_•sty's suite, and th,! 1 dies attending the drawing room shall appear in dresses of British manufacture." Lord J. RUSSELL said he must decline answering such a que;tion.—( Hear, hear.) CANADIAN REBELLION. Mr. GO UL BURN asked what was the probable amount of the expenditure which had been incurred by calling out the militia, and other troops, to suppress the insurrection in our North American provinces? The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER *aid he was aware any financial statement would be incomplete if it did not contain the information which the Honourable Gentleman required. He was sorry to say that he was not in a condition to state the exact amount of the expences; undoubtedly no difficulty would arise in stating the amount which had been incurred up to the period of the last dispatches from Canada ; but the pressure had been so extreme and so unexpected, that it was obviously impossible, with the existing machinery for superintending this expenditure to arrive at an accurate knowledge respecting it. The Right Hon. Gentleman proceeded to state, as we understood, that a Board of Commissariat had been appointed to manage t'-e expences, but their report had not yet been received. Directly it was it would be laid on the table of the House. The strictest instructions had been issued to curtail the expenses within reasonable bounds ; and he would use every exertion in his power to lay before the House all the information he could obtain. Mr. GOULBURN—WouId the Right Hon. Gentleman state the amount already expended. The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said that on Friday he would endeavour to give the best reply he could, but it would be imperfect. Lord JOHN RUSSELL said with reference to a ques tion put to him the other night by an Hon. Member, that he had ordered the restrictions upon soldiers not to walk in the Parks to be removed.—( Cheers. ) Mr. HUME wished to know on what day he could bring forward his question respecting the Bank of England? Lord JOHN RUSSELL thought the Hon. Member should give notice for some notice day. CONSOLIDATED FUND BILL. Lord J. RUSSELL then moved the Order of the Day for the House going into Committee on the Consolidated Fund Bill. Sir ROBERT INGLIS did not think the Noble Lord had given an answer to his question. Ile wished to know whether the procession would be the same as at former Coronations. Lord J. RUSSELL said that formerly the procession was from the Hall to the Abbey, but in the present instance it would be through the streets. , The House then went into Committee on the Consolidated Fund Bill, which went through without amendment. POOR LAWS—IRELAND. The House having resumed, Lord J. RUSSELL moved the third reading of the Irish Poor Law Bill. Mr. O'CONNELL presented a petition against the measure from the noblemen, merchants, bankers, and others of Dublin. The first name to the petition was that of Lord Roden, and it was also signed by Mr. Hamilton, the late Mem ber for the city. The question having been put, the Hon. and Learned Member looked round much perplexed, and moved that the Bill be read a second time that day six months. Sir WILLIAM B RAB AZ ON then appeared amidst loud laughter, and said the Honourable and Learned Member had got the start of him. He would give the Bill all the opposition in his power, as it was not what was wanted for the happiness of Ireland. The Hon. Member then alluded to the number of petitions that had been presented from various parts of Ireland against the Bill, and observed that nothing could more strongly express the sense of the coun try, which was decidedly opposed to the measure, which was unsuited to the wants and wishes of the people of Ireland. The Hon, Member concluded by moving that the Bill be read a third time that day six months. Sir F. TRENCH said, if the Hon. Member had not moved this amendment he himself had intended to do so. For he did believe that no Bill regarding Ireland had ever been proposed which would be productive of more mischief—that it would annihilate property and extinguish industry. The Irish la bourers were willing and anxious to work—employment ought to be given them instead of erecting workhouses, to destroy the seeds of industry throughout the country. Ile hoped he had said enough to convince the House that the measure would be anything but satisfactory to the people of Ireland. Ile trusted the Bill would be rejected; and he would suggest to the Noble Lord, the Secretary for Ireland, the propriety of introducing, in the next session of Parliament, a Bill for the relief of the indigent and infirm poor, and another Bill having for its object the employment of the able-bodied poor of that country. Lord CASTLEREAGH could not allow the Bill to be read a third time without entering his decided protest against it. The people of Ireland were decidedly opposed to the workhouse system, and there was also a very strong objection to the large amount of patronage, and the great number of offices which it would create. He believed there was an English party in that House, who were impressing strongly upon the Government the necessity of establishing a system of Poor-laws for Ireland, and although he was not prepared to assert that some measure was not required, he denied that th e p resen t measure wou ld effect the objects for which it w as i n t en d e d.—(H ear , h e ar.) He regretted to say'that many of those who were most strenuous in advocating a system of Poor-laws for Ireland were among the persons who were most ignorant of the wants, or habits, or character of the people. In Ireland there was a vast deal of charity on the part of the poorer classes, and the charitable feeling would be much diminished by the establishment of the work house system, the only object of which appeared to be the en abling Government to exercise the patronage of Commissioner ships, and Assistant-C omm issionerships. He (Lord Castle reagh) considered it would have been much better to adopt the proposition he had made iii Committee, to allow parishes that were willing so to do, to assess themselves. He entirely agreed with the Hon. and Learned Member in his decided opposition from first to last to this Poor-law Bill. At a meeting in Belfast, Dr. Cooke, who was well known as the Honourable and Learned Member's political enemy, proposed three cheers for him, for having strenuously opposed the Bill.—( Laughter.) Why did not the Hon. and Learned Member at once come forward, and tell the Noble Lord that if he did not withdraw this Bill he would withdraw his support from the Government?—(Cheers ) Mr. O'CONNELL would implore of the Government to mark the novel spectacle of the Noble Lord and himself rising, one after the other, to protest against the present measure. Men of all parties—the clergy of all religions, the Grand Juries and in fact all pers- ns and parties in Ireland—were opposed to it. Ile implored of the Government to pause before they attempted to resist the prayer of unanimous Ireland.— ( Loud cheers.) The Irish labourer required no stimulus to labour—it was well known that they travelled in thou sands every year 700 miles, from the extremity of Connaught to the extremity of Kent, for the purpose of earning a few weeks' wages. The whole system then was based upon that blundering species of legislation. Why were clergymen of all denominations to be excluded from being Guardians of the poor, while the magistrates (mid he meant them no disrespect) were to be ex officio auardians ? If they had reversed the proposition, and made the clergymen guardians while they excluded the magistrates, they would have evinced t better acquaintance with the condition and habits of the people.—( Cheers.) It appeared that there was to be no re. lief out of the workhouses. Why, such a system never could be carried into effectual operation in Ireland. Again, the Bill prevented neither vagrancy nor mendicity.—(Hear, hear.) It gave no control whatever over it, in direct contradiction of every principle of poor.law relief, letting it roam at large. In England it was prohibited, but not so in Ireland. There it would exist to as great an extent and as unchecked as ever. The farmer would still be troubled with impor tunity from the vagrant mendicant ; and, in addition to what his charity m i g ht prompt him to bestow on that class, he would have to bear a tax for the workhouse paupers. Again, the Bill gave no settlement, and in its absence there would be no temptation to the landlord to take care of his own particular tenants. He was not one of those who gave in to indiscriminate censure of the landlords of Ireland. But it could not be forgotten that there were some harsh landl ords in Ireland, and d palliation for oppres- that this Bill would be used by them for their own objects. They would allege that they paid a regular tax f or the support of wouldtheir inferiort)e t h e ir tenants.exc us e an should be re mem b ere d sive poor-houses, con d uct towards and that h also, that seven-tenths of the t ax would be imposed on th e occupants of t land, and only three-tenths on landlords; so that the absentee landlord, who did not occupy his land, would escape with a c omparatively small imposition, while the resident landlord, who did occupy his land, would he compelled to bear the heavier portion of the burden. Remembering how many unsettled questions there still were respecting 16 Ireland—the tithe question, the corporation question, &c.—it appeared to him to be injudicious to bring forward a measure, on the merits which such diffe rence of opinion existed. The expense of it would be enormous. The erection of the workhouses was estimated at 7 00,0001., and it was prubabk it would run up to a mill on. Then there Wes the ono mous staff: For these workhouses there must be 300 chaplains, To this must he added the expense of the Poor-law Commissioners, cf the guardians, &c. He had said on a former occasion that Ireland was too poor for a poor-law. Was he not right ? The greatest anxiety at pre. sent existed among the people of -Ireland to support their poor, but it was found impossible. Why load them with the additional expense of this enormous staff? Why expend one-tenth of the gross rental of the country to construct machinery which was to extract a million a year from the pockets Of the people ? At present the balance of agricultural produce between England and Ireland was greatly in favour of Ireland ; but an acre of land in Ireland was capable of producing four times more than an acre in England, if sufficient capital were laid out in cultivation arid manure. Of that capital, however, this measure went to deprive the Irish farmer. In Ireland the agricultural labourer could obtain only a shilling or eighteenpence a day ; in England the agricultural labourer obtained half-a-crown a day ; yet, under such circumstances, it was proposed to lay a million of additional taxation on Ireland. Profits were small ; wages were small ; but taxa tion was to be increased. In recompence for not giving to Ireland the Bills by which she would be benefited, they wished to give her this shutting up, prison Bill, and that was one of the results of the blessed union. If he had chosen to do so, he could easily, by the aft', o Cation of a false humanity, have justified his concurrence in the incr. sure; but he preferred opposing the measure, as he shou:d always do every measurewhitji In hit dpini;in witscaleuleted to do injitry to 'lreland. Lord MORPETH said, great stress was now laid on apparent sym toms of repugnance to, the measure in Ireland by those who were hardly Pearl in etiP! - -tsitlell !.5 its curly seas so t r iti the long intervals . of its eoneideration btit Who now, at the tenth or eleeLemti; Neer; ce i lled on the Hearse Jo stop, short, and to postpone the 13111 to a future period. He mndt Confess he felt ioniesehat surprised that these symptoms did not manifest ihemseivee a t perioie It was impossible but that many objections must lie to the details ci airy` ineristmri inttothreieg a poor-law into Ireland. Yet, though the Honourable and Leaffleti 4ele: tleman and the Noble Lord had in former stages entered into an exami nation of the details of the measure, they now refused to admit the principle of the introduction of the poor-law into Ireland. With respect to the present measure, it was natural that it should disappoint two parties in Ireland. Those who were to be the recipients of the proposed relief would be disappointel that that relief was not more extensive ; those who were to contribute the relief would be alarmed and jealous at the extent to which they were to be called upon for that purpose. But fur all those different kinds of opposition it was the ditty of her Majes ty's Government to be prepared. They had been so prepared; they had stood by the principle of their measure; they had yielded no part of thet prieciple to influence or opposition, except where it was shown by fir and open argument that some portions of the Bill Was dieseeptible of improvement. It had been said before, and the Honourable Barre - let weo had that evening moved the amendment repeated the charge, that Government had shown themselves very stiflerrecked in this matter, and that they had not paid the deference which they ought to the opinions of gentlemen coming from the country in which the proposed measure was to operate. Now, although Government had unquestionably adhered to the principle of the measure, it was incorrect to say that they had not adopted the suggestions made to them with respect to the details, whenever those suggestions appeared to be deserving of adoption. In proof of this he would refer to the numerous changes in the Bid which had been introduced in the Committee.--(The Noble Lord here read a list of the changes to which he alluded, comprehending—the consent of the Guardians to be indispensable to dissolve any union; the definition of the circumstances under which Guardians were to be ap ; ointed ; the checks put upon grants for emigration ; the total exclu. lion of the vagrancy clauses, &c. lee.) It had been further alleged that this Bill was to be carried in spite of the sentiments and votes of time Members for Ireland. Now he had made out a catalogue of the votes on the subject. It appeared that on the principle of the Bill (the ques tion being the Speaker's leaving the chair), the Irish Members who voted in favour of the Bill were tifty.six in number, the number who voted against it was sixteen. It might be said, however, that the ma. jority on that occasion waited to make alterations in the Committee. It appeared, however, that in twenty-five divisions which took place in the Committee there were only eight in which there was a ma. jority against Government. In the other seventeen cases the majority was in favour of Government Honest and sincere as he believed the contributors to the Poor-rate, the opponents of the Bill, to be, he could not help turning from what he considered their exaggerated ap prehensions to the poorer classes of the Irish people, wandering on the highways, or perishing in their cabins. At the last of the meetings of the kind to which he had alluded, and which had taken place in Dub. lin, Mr. Staunton, the respectable editor of a Dublin newspaper, spoke of the horrid destitution of the lower classes in the county of Tipperary. The Honourable and Learned Member for Dublin replied that that might be the case in a particular district, but that was no argument for the general introduction of a Poor-law. Upon this the Rev. Mr. Toole, a Catholic Clergyman, rose to address the meeting. Mr. Toole stated that he resided in the county of Kildare; that he was well acquainted with the state of the poor in that county; that there were annually hun dreds of them who died of want, but who would have been saved by a Poor-law; that it was unimportant whether the names of bastiles or prisons Were given to their places of reception, but that it was very im. portant, that they should be rescued from utter destitution ; that whole families were living in houses without roofs, exposed to the open air; that sickness, consequently, spread among them to a most distressing extent ; that all the wealthy people of the country were absent; and that he hoped something would be done to alleviate the dreadful misery which Prevailed. Now, in his (Lord Morpeth's) opinion, this short simple statement outwent all the logic of the opponents of the Bill, and its elo. quence exceeded theirs. The most practical objection which had been made to the Bill was the allege] deficiency of means which the proposed workhouses would possess for the relief of the destitute; while, on the other hand, great stress was laid upon the sentiments of repugnance felt by the poor of Ireland to be received into the workhouses at all. Now, with reference to this last objection, he would ask whether, if they hoped to devise any measure which would materially relieve the poor without ruining the country by its enormous expense, it was not the safest plan, while they rendered it impossible for the poor to perish from star vation, if they chose to avoid it,. to make the mode of relief so irksome and unattractive, as to render a dependence on their own labour and exertions as alluring as possible ?--(Hear.) The alleged repugnance to workhouses would operate in two ways. It would operate on the contributors to relief, and it would operate on the recipients of relief. On the latter it would operate by inducing them to find employment, that they might escape the necessity of going into the workhouses; on the former it would operate by inducing them to give employment, that they might escape the necessity of contribution. In truth, from this indirect working of the Bill be anticipated the greatest portion of the advantages which, in his opinion, would flow from it. With respect to emigration, he was undoubtedly of opinion that, well and judiciously conducted, it would operate with great advantage to Ire land ; but it would not be sufficient in itself, unaided by any system of poor laws to remove all the di s t ress w hi c h unhappily existed in that country. He should like to know what scheme of emigration, or what system of out-door relief, maintained by an assessment upon land, could be established in Ireland for the relief of a distressed imputa tion, arneunting to 2,300,000 souls, if it were desired that the proprie. tors of that country should remain in possession of a single acre of the lands which they now held ?--(Hear, hear.) Under these circumstances he was strongly of opinion that the system of relief proposed in the pre. sent Bill was at once the simplest, the most comprehensive, and the best that could be established. Felix faustutnque sit is the prayer with which we now launch it forth into the world, and I feel assured that it is a prayer which will find an echo in the breast of every man who feels an interest in the welfare of Ireland.—(Hear, hear.) Mr. YOUNG (Cavan) expressed his approval of the Bill. Lord PO WERSCOURT thought the Bill well calculated to insure to the poor of Ireland that just relief which they had a right to expect from the humanity of our enlightened nature, without imposing unnecessary burdens upon the property of individuals. Sir EDMUND HAYES was decidedly opposed to the Bill. He looked upon the striking out of the ,vagrant clauses as an additional de fect in the measure. Mr. CORRY was also opposed to the Bill. Mr. M. BELLEW, considering the paramount necessity of some legislative enactment upon the subject, felt himself compelled to give his assent to the measure. Colonel CONOLLY was instructed by his constituents, when the Bill was first introduced, to support the principle of it, and the feeling of his own mind inclined him to do so; but he now felt compelled to depart from that course, because the amendments which lie conceived to be indispensable to render the Bill efficient had heen rejected in Committee. The great evil of Irsiand was poverty, and poverty could not be removed by additional impositions. Colonel VERNER would not oppose any really good measure, but he felt obliged to vote against the present inefficient plan. Sir EDWARD SUGDEN supported the plan proposed in the pre sent measure, because he thought that the test of destitution which it established was time best that could be adopted ; and if they were to re lieve destitution they must have a test. He supported this Bill from a solemn conviction that it would raise.the condition of the lower orders of the people—(Hear, hear) and compel the landed interest of Ireland to take more deeply into consideration the state of the labouring classes in that country. Mr. SHEIL agreed in the opinion that party feelings should not be excited in a discussion of this description. Be would not stop to in. quire how locking up the beggars would have the effect of putting down the independence of the ten-pound voters. He must say, however, that a total abstinence from political topics argued a false delicacy which lie did not understand. The Duke of Wellington had stated in another place, where he had the power of carrying his announcement into effect, that he looked upon the Poor-law as a preliminary measure to the adop. Lion of Corporate Reform. The Noble Duke wanted the rate not solely for the purpose of relieving the poor, but as the standard for time qua. lification. Such an intimation had certainly been given. Now, he did not think that Corporation Reform had the slightest natural connection with the Poor-law Bill, notwithstanding the artificial connection attempted to be made between them also. Between poor -rates and tithes he did think that the strongest identity existed. Why ? Because both were charges on the land, and both were matters of ex periMent The Commissioners appointed by the Government reported a plan by which tithes might be converted into a plan for the main tenance of the poor. Now, what he wished to ask itas, while the tithe question was pending, was it not better to delay the settlement of the Poor -law Bill, when the two measures were, to a certain extent, an ex perhnent ? Mark the origin of the question. At what time was it pressed on the public mind ? In 1829 and 1830, by 1)r. Doyle, in his celebrated pamphlets, in which he proposed the substitution of poor_ rates for tithes. What occurred in 1831 ? The Member for Wicklow, seconded by Lord Carew, and supported by a large body of the Irish Members, framed resolutions, by which it was proposed that poor-rates should be substituted for tithes. In 1831 these proposals were brought forward in a pure, an unreformed Parliament—(A laugh)—for convert ing tithe into a land-tax, to promote the purposes of charity and reli gion. Lord Grey came into office in 1831, and in 1832 that step was taken with regard to the tithe questioa which had caused enormous litigation, and had, at this moment, caused a great accumulation of the arrears of tithes. It should never be put out of their 'consideration that they were now about to make an expe riment whilst enormous arrears of tithes still remained due. What 'was the plan proposed by the Right Hon. Baronet the Member for Tam worth in 1835 ? Why, that Right llon. Gentleman admitted that the tithe question never could Ise settled until they paid off all the arrears. The evil felt then was one which had since increased. What, then, was his argument ? That they should not impose a new tax on Ireland before those enormous accumulations were, not to say discharged, but even in the slightest degree reduced. He did not mean to vote against it ; his objection to it was, that its exact adaptation to the state of the country was not considered. What was the state of Ireland now ? The clergy had claims due to them to the amount of nearly 2,000,000!. The clergy themselves owed the State 600,000!. The greatest body of the farmers are those whose leases were previous to the Composition Act, and owed arrears of five or six years. What was the state of the landlords ? Th ose who held land at 40s. an acre paying 3s. tithe, paid 37, and put the 3s. into their pockets. Hiving reviewed the state of the clergy, the farmers, and the landlords, he wished to know was it judicious at this moment to press a Bill of this nature, and to impose a new incumbrance before they got rid of the difficulties incidental to the tithe question ? If this Bill were carried without the Tithe Bill it would cause great practical confusion, wit h a great deal of political discontent. What did he want? He wanted a delay of this measure, not its ultimate frustration. A whole some delay, with a view to adapt it to the feelings of the Irish people. He was the representati ve o f a great county by a majority of 1,000, co mposed not only of 101. but of 20!. voters; and in this great agricul curet district there existed but one feeling throughout the gentry, the middle-classes, the shopkeepers, and the farmers; all were anxious for the settlement of the tithe question before the Poor-law Bill. They ought not to hurry and precipitate this measure. Ile was really Oslo. nished at the change of opinion which had taken place on this subject. Th e present Chancellor of the Exchequer was once a vehement oPponent of Poor-laws; the Member for North Lancashire was once also a vehement opponent of Poor-laws. So was the Right Hon. Gentleman the Member for Tamworth, and the Marquis of Lansdowne. What had produced the change ? He admitted there was a change in public opinion, but it was the public opinion of this country, which he knew was peremptory and emp h at i c. Lord CLEMENTS maintained that there was no connection between t ith es and the present measure, and he looked upon the speech of the }lon. Member for Tipperary as thebest confirmation of what the Duke of Wellington had stated in another place. He should vote for the mea sure as the best remedy proposed for an evil which all admitted. Mr. LUCAS thought that the Hon. and Learned Member for Tippe rary had a fair title to the credit of having relieved the languor of the present debate, by introducing into it the tithe question, so remarkable for the animosity which it inspired. He had three objections to the present Bill, which, in his opinion, marred the principles on which it professed to proceed. The first was, that there was a law of settlement by accident merely instead of by birth or servitude ; secondly, that a certain class were exempted from the payment of tithe ; and, thirdly, because the unions were too large. His second objection was to the 5!. clause, which had already been under the consideration of time House ; and his theed objection was one on which he certainly should net detain the House-s-ihe alluded to the subject of settlement. He must express his approval of the principle of the Bill, at the same time that he could not but express his dissatisfaction at its details. Mr. W. ROCHE should cordially vote for the third reading of the Bill, and hesincerely trusted that it would be carried both in this and the other House of Parliament. '4r. C. F. THOMSON was sorry to find that the Hon. Gentleman Mr. F. FRENCH was sure that his Honourable Friend would object any further to the course he proposed, when he understood that the discussion was to take place in Committee. An arrangement had been made by the delegates from Ireland, which was sanctioned by the Eng_ lish and Scotch Colleges, and which was approved of by Sir B. Brodie, Sir A. Cooper, Sir A. Carlisle, and others. They were anxious, before the discussion took ptace, that the details of the Bil l should be before the House, and that some alterations should be made. He merely meant that the Bill should go through Committee pro forma, and after wards that the discussion might take place. Mr. WA KLEY said, that kith the understanding that the 13111 should be brought forward at an early period of the evening ; before the Com mittee was gone into, he hoped that no objection would be made to the course now proposed by the Hon. Member for Roscommon. The Bill, theyopinion, o ug h trequired v ery material alt era ti ons. He thought, then,ll in that his a very f u ll d i scussion upon it, and he therefore trusted that no oppositi on would now be made to the se.. t cond reading. Mr. O'CONNELL observed that it was only necessary now to un derstand that the Hon. Member for Roscommon merely intended to go into Committee pro forma. To that Hon. Member some alterations had been suggested which he wished to adopt, and having done that in the Committee, then to take a discussion on the motion for the re-com mitment of the Bill so far as the principle of the Bill was concerned. No doubt that discussion must come on at an early hour in the even ng; for it were to come on at a late hour, it would be only necessary to ad journ it to another evening, The importance of the Bill could not be exaggerated; and if it were not brought on at an early hour in the evening, it would be impossible to have its merits discussed without an adjournment. Sir ROBERT PEEL hoped that an opportunity would not only be given for a full discussion upon the general principles of the Bill; but also, that portion of it, in which the medical practitioners were so deeply interested.—(Hear, hear.) A full oPportunity ought to be given for considering that ve r y important gOitien. There ought to be an in terval of time between the detittiV Of the Bill being laid before them, and the moment when the Ifotisle"would be called upon to take them into consideration. He hoped that the Hon. Gentleman i.. moving the next stale of the Bill, would give to Me bets as full a diacussinn tl ey might have had upon the motion for a second reading.—(fi car, ". ) Mr. F. FRENCH said that the course which he.nieant to purane qAs this----as soon as he had got the Bill reported, then he Would, with fire co4urrence of the different parties, tix a day for the discussion at a tant period --(Hear, hear.) The sootier, however, the iiill:was no w advanced the better. H av i n g once ma d e t h e a l terat i ons liedesired tc; make,•and put the. Bill in pr o p er li irm b e f ore th e H ouse , then he Owl' fix a day for the discussion ; it would be at least a fortnight distant COI the period when the was so before the House, and so as to lo t 4 4 the medical pr ac titi oners h ave a full opportunity for putt i ng forward their views tipm this subject.—(Hear.) Sir It. FERGUSSON remarked that there were two principles in this Hill--one was that in whi c h th e me di ca l pract i t i oners felt meat deeply interested, and the other was that to which he most stronglY n b " jetted, nam:ly, that which gave a power to a certain Committee of ro c " dleal gentlemen to have placed under them the medical charities in Ir e " fond, and to assess the counties in Ireland as they might think tit. He could not allow the socond reading of the Bill to pass unopposed , if , it were intended to retain th a t p ar t o f th e Bill . With suc h an objec tionable principle in the Bill he could not allow the Bill to pass neP ; posed, arid should take the sense of the House upon it. T h e Grand Juries of 'Wand ought not to be dep r i ve d o f th e power o f reg ulating 31)d c.altrolling the expcnses tobc imposed upon the rate-payers by any super: intending Charity B oar d w h a t ever. H e would not wish to give to a ny ft , c' Board the power of i m p os i ng w h at sum they liked, without th e Grand ' Jury being able to comma the expenditure. He objected so muc h to that principle in the that he should now move that this Bil l be read a second time that day six months. Mr. F. FRENCH was, h e sa id , as anx i ous to save the amoun t o f the County cess as the H m Member who had just spoken. That which ha d b ce d objected to, he did n o t h o ld t o h e a part of the principle o f the B ib ' as the prioCi . ole was for the extension and protection of medical charities in Ireland. Sir It. FUR GUSSON . Asked if the Hon, Member would omit ° int , portion of the Bill, if he did not hold it to be an essential part o the Bill ? Mr. WARBURTON thought it right to give notice that there was one portion of the Bill to which he objected, namely, that the Commission under the Bill, to whom very great pow ers were given, was to consis t oni of professional men, without any laymen being added to it. n e de cidedly objected to any such proce e di ng . If th ei e was to be A Board - n Management, there should be laymen added to that Board. Mr. S. O'BRIEN did not think that the course of proce , ' which had been devised was that which was the best adapted for useful discussion upon this subject. It would be in the power of MO; he to give suggestions in the d e b a t e th at must arise upon the sec ° . reading. No such opportunity was afforded by the present cou rse h The Hon. Member for Roscom mon h a d t h e opportunity of ma ki n g such amendments as might be proposed by himself ; but he could n ° afterwards take advantage of the suggestions offered b• others, unless be c:llloented to regard as the second stage"of the Bill the motion for r e ' commitment, He confessed that he was himself very sorry, for the sake of having the information that ought to b e a ff or d e d upon this Aubje ct before the pubil : that they did not at once go into a discussion upo n 'ha r. general principle or the Bill. He hop e d a l ong i nterval of time WT,. be allowed to take place between the discussion on th e Bill , an d the • ther proceeding with it. felt Lord CLEMENTS believed that tho stron g e s t o bj ec ti on w ould be te to this Bill. He took that opp or t un ity of gaying that he intended t o ° i f against it. He did not expect the Bill could go through Committee', the lie were to vote for the Bill, on e o f th e most essent i a l pr i nc i p les 4 Bill must be omitted by his Hon. Friend. This Bill gave a contract v money to others than those who p a id th e t ax. H e could not consent to take the money of the cess-payers, and leave it to the control of th ose, who did not pay cess. H e a d m itt e d t h at great advantages must derived from improving the position of the great medical college', anj therefore this Bill would be so far beneficial ; but he objected to introducing the power of taxing th e I r i s h peop l e for purposes o f obt ,l ° l ing an advantage for medical peopl e . H e o bj ected to the Bill a lt o gethe r, and was then prepared to go into its discussion. Lord MORPETH called upon the House to give its support to tb ii , Bill, because the object of it was not that which it had been represents to be. They could not have a full and proper discussion on the t before the second reading, as they were prepared to make very essentlead alterations in it. Hoping, the n , th a t hi s H on. Friend would be all°9l-0, to proceed with the second reading, with the understanding that Pl en ty , of time would be given for its su b sequent discussion, he begge d to understood as no further pl e d ge d to the principle of the Bill than th;;', that lie expected they w ou ld b e a b le to devise some efficient mod e 'o the inspection of medical c h ar iti es i n Ireland. As to the composition o f the Board, and the particular powers to be given to the Board, t hel were points which required the greatest consideration. The Bill was then read a second time. To be committed to a C oin. mittee of the whole House on Tuesday. JOINT-STOCK BANKS. The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER having moved the SP ',ointment of the Committee on Joint-Stock Banks, Mr. FINCH complained th a t th e i nterests of the Joint-Stoc k v s- h l• e oflssUe were not fairly represented i n th e Committee. There believed, but one member of the Committee who was connected with Joint-Stock Bank of issue, and he was the Hon. and Learned Member for Dublin, Re concluded by moving that Mr. O rms b y G o re be add ed to the Committee, The CHANCELLOR 6: the EXCHEQUER said, gar as regarded the _ Hon. and Learned Member f o r lin being the on ly member on Committee connected with Joint-St oc k lia:lks of i ssue , the Hon. Ge nt e o the man was under a mistak e ; th e H on. MoZber for Whltebav eltva te c connected with one of those b a nk s, an d h e had attended the Colon . '" - very regularly. o tion After a few words from Mr. O'Commata. and Mr. HtThl, the M was negatived without a division, and the following Colon' appointed :—Mr. Chancellor of the Exchequer, Sir Robert reel' gr. Poulctt Thomson, Sir James Graham, Mr. Clay, Mr. Goulburn,io Baring, Mr. Loch, Mr. John Abel Smith, Mr. Pattison, matt 11 o'Conne ' Attwood, Mr. Strati, Sir Thomas Fremantle. Mr. Shaw, Mr. Mr. Jephson. ittee ;ar. STANDING ORDERS. e Mr. DILLON BROWNE m ove d th at so much o f the ninth gneral , .0 Standing Order as requires a su b scr i pt i on contrast, and t he lodgme nt one-tenth part of the am o unt subscribed, may, as regards Irela nd, be dls: pensed with, in case the Commissioners of Public Works in that countr: give an undertaking to ad vance , b y way o f loan, three-fourths th amount of the estimates towards the production of the work required. After a few words from the CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER and Mr' O'CONNELL, the motion was withdrawn. SLAVE-TRADE—SWEDEN AND THE NETHERLANDS. Upon the motion of Lord PALMERSTON, a Bill to carry into cfreC additional articles to the treaties with Sweden and the Netherlands, re" lative to the Slave Trade, were read a first time. SLAVE TRADE-THE HANSE.TOWNS. Upon the motion of Lord PALMERSTON the House went into Committee for the purpose of passing a resolution to be made the foun dation for a Bill to carry into effect the treaty with the Hanse-town' , relative to the Slave Trade. A resolution was then agreed to as a foundation for a Bill. The House then resumed; when leave was given to bring in the Bi l l' Lord PALMERSTON obtained leave to bring in a Bill to establio' courts in China. _, .. .. ... The two last mentioned Bills were then brought in, read a first Wil e ' and ordered to be read a second time on Friday. The House adjourned at half-past twelve. • - • SCOTS LAW ARRANGEMENTS.—We belie" It 015 f ' now fixed t h a t M r. J o h n S . S tewart is to be the Shellff , Stirling, in room o f Si r R eg i nald Seton Macdonald, d e ceased Mr. Stewart has now acted as a Depute-Advocate for near l y eight years, under successive Liberal Administrations; t a__„ l from his high professional character, his appointment Tat give great satisfaction to the county. We understand 11:at that Mr. Ivory has resigned the Sheriffship of Bute, ant:lrt eve Mr. Robert Hunter is to succeed to that office. We " e ;:ot that Mr. Ivory has taken this step from finding the fr i e q -e i es journeys to the county, as well as to the depenu, en- t h o of a remote district, now required from Sheriffs under the o r Reform Act, and other recent Statutes, not convenient ~t compatible w ith hi s extens i ve and increasing pract i c e : 0 Cie Bar. In this view, it is impossible to app 3 r eciate ' l ° ,, highly the honourable and disinterested course followed ( i this able and exce ll ent person. It not only marks his high feelin g s o f d uty , b ut affor _ ls a practical contradiction to t t. H . , assertions of those wh o t reat t h e o ffi ce of Sheriff-Depu te, 1 " ) ,i whomsoever filled, as a sinecure. Indeed, this is the sec",, instance, withi n th e l ast twenty years, of Sheriffs in high Pra-ci tice resigning their office (Lord Cotehouse having resign . ., the Sheriffship o f S ut h er l and in 1819) to enable them to et. sue their prof ess i ona l career with more undivided attenti o% We trust th a t M r. I vory will long enjoy health and vigour Th reap the fruits of his high-minded resolution; and althougt we think th e county hi ghly fortunate in having a successor him of the talents and principles of Mr. Hunter, we are 5 ° that all classes in the county will feel the loss of such a man as Mr. Ivory, as no ordinary deprivation.—Scotsman. GALLERY OF COMICALITIES, Part VI., f r0 " 1 Bell's Life in Lonlen, will be ready for delivery to-rnorrov!' at 170, Strand ; an d, i n addition to the usual Series of ° rl , - ., ginal Ilumourous Sket c h es o f Ch aracter, illustrated in Pr°sw and Verse, will contain splendid impressions of " The wat e r; 100 Shield " and " The Doncaster Cup," which appeared the columns of th e same paper last year, and were so Ilig h 'Y appreciated. The price will he, as usual, but Threepenc e ;, 1 and the wh o l e Si x N um b ers, containing nearly Five Huntrehe Comic En grav i ngs , may b e had for Eighteen-pence " Engravings alone cost 2,000 guineas, and of the former ro i l ; hers con s id era bl y more than a million have been sold. r i trade will be supplied as heretofore, and impressions not scu d previous to the Ist of January, 1839, will be taken back, an the money returned. Never out of print. A meeting of Trades' Delegates was held in tool on Wednesday evening, to make arrangements for a public Ce' uj'ti r thmonstration, in the shape of an outdoor meeting, to etition ,„ P Household Suffrage, Annual Parliaments, and Vote by Ballot.- -, Advertiser. SETS OF PLATED DISH COVERS, W 1 ,4 00 Tli STRONG SILVER EDGES , may be selected of I ''i ri g Patterns, p r i ce 161. t h e Set, at T. COX SAVORY'S, Work,„, Goldsmith, Sil versm i th, and Watchmaker, 47, Cernhill, Lon°, (Seven D oors from Graccehur c h- street ) . T he Set cons i s t s °f 0 0v cover 20, 18, 14, and 12 inches diameter. f r N.B.—The th ree Sh ow R ooms contain a large variety of su LPet—of Silver-edged Plated Good s . A P amphlet, containing a i'. -of to o Prices and D raw i ngs of Silver Spoons and Forks, Silver Plated Good s , W atc h es, Clocks, &c., may be had gratis, or will forwarded in answer to a post-paid application. ~..--- TEAS at WHOLESALE- PRICES, in Quantities n °t less than One Pound. Ad. Black, 35., :3s. 6d., 3s. 10d., 4 5 ., S ma ll L eaf Gunpow d er, ss. - 4s. 6d , ss. Chocolate t'''co Imperial Gunpo w d er , s s . 4d . cwt. 885. lc- T. G. MANSELL an d C0.,C0 Wholesale T e a-dealers, 2, — ac oa 9d . p l e o r d l b . . , p e r or p l e b r . vs: ; Young Hyson, 4 s . 4d., 4 s . Bd . 1. 8; lersbury, Cheapside. IRTHS. On the 26th u lt., at Liverp B 001, the lady of Henry Cleaver Char man, Esq., of a daughter. On the 27th ult., the lady of E. Power, Esq., of a daughte MA IE D. On the 2G t h u l t., at 13roa RR dwater Church, Worthing, Richard Edward Cumberland, Esq., to Adela Magdalen, only surv iving daughter o f t h e l ate Henry Garioch Vernon. On the 24th ult., in Upper Gower-street, Mrs. Sophia Pa tch, aged 70. On the 27th ult., in Arlington-street, Sir Richard Carr Glyn' Bart., aged 84. At Florence, on the 9th ult., Constance Cecilia :Marquise do Bourbel, youngest daughter of the late Parr Bulkeley, Esq. On the 25th ult., at Worthing, Mrs. Stephens, widow of John Stephens, Esq., of Bridgenorth, aged 69. "9 On the 24th o f M arc h (0.5.), a t St. P e t ers b urg h, aged I s Joseph Busch, Esq., Botanical Gardener to the Emperor of Bussia• London : Printed and Published by MURDO YOUNG, of No. 112, Strand, at The Sun Office, No. 112, Strand, in the county of Middlesex.—Tuesday, May 1, 1838.